@ Duke, you can read more about the MBN G-Adapters at http://mikrobusnet.org/bb/index.php/topic,92.0.html
@ ianlee74 - Mbed Gadgeteer Adapter?
You can find out more information about using Virtual Sockets on a MBN mainboard at http://mikrobusnet.org/bb/index.php/topic,94.0.html
2 Likes
Nope 
It is Grove.
2 Likes
@ Pete Brown : the latest MikroE IDE is quite good, to me. Indeed, it is not Visual Studio but it is very functional, now.
They also have a Visual editor for their graphic boards that lets you design screens very easily and saves you a fair amount of coding otherwise.
@ Duke Nukem : Stephen (scardinale) did post very good information (links) about G-Adapters.
What we had in mind when we built them was to try to conciliate two “incompatible” modules designs. Indeed, Gadgeteer assigns a function to a socket whereas MikroBus offers many functions to a socket. This is a completely different way of thinking.
Another reason why we wanted to do that was that GHI provides a wide range of boards that could (can) work in pure NETMF although they are sold as Gadgeteer boards. We thought that it would be good for NETMF if everything could work on with standard NETMF methods.
Lastly, about those adapters, this opens up a wider range of modules to be used with NETMF. Think about around 100 Click boards and almost 140 Gadgeteer modules that can be run with NETMF ! Each one being delivered with its schematics so that it can be incorporated easily (or not 
) on a custom board.
This is one little building block, indeed, but still.
By the way, the indications on the bottom silkscreen are speaking by themselves, if you read carefully 
And there will be “soon” (in the next two months I think) very good news about all this 
1 Like
Thanks. I’ll have to give their IDE and UI designer a try again. I sent them a TON of feedback on design issues with the IDE in the past. Some was visual (mixture of XP, Vista, and modern design pieces, all clashing in the same IDE) and the rest were bugs and overall “Wat?” moments.
On your stuff, are the click board drivers open source? Are they reasonable to port beyond NETMF?
Pete
[quote=“Pete Brown”]On your stuff, are the click board drivers open source? Are they reasonable to port beyond NETMF?
Pete
[/quote]
Drivers and core are open source. You can download everything from the “Downloads” page of our website : http://www.mikrobusnet.org/downloads-2
Drivers are pure NETMF C# without anything “tricky” in them. So I would say that they should be easy to port.
I was wondering, can the clickboards fit in the Cerbuino Bee “xbee” Slot? I think that would be super cool
The XBee Socket is a 2X10 Pin header with a 2 mm pitch and the MikroE click form factor is a 2x8 Pin with a standard 0.1 inch (2.54 mm) pitch. So the short answer is no.
Even if the footprint was compatible, the pin assignments between the two are incompatible and would not work.
How hard would it be to put a clickboard slot on a FEZ board? is it hard to rewire the stuff?
NEVERMIND-
Found this cool thing
http://www.robotshop.com/ca/en/arduino-uno-click-shield.html
@ MRTFEREN - MBN Team got that covered. Read from beginning of this thread. There are plenty of options to use Click modules with MBN main boards.
4 Likes
But I love my Gadgeteer FEZ toomuch
Sometimes one must make sacrifices to achieve ones goals.
The Arduino Uno Click Shield will work with the Cerbuino Bee, but you will have to develop your own drivers for the individual click boards. Or simpler yet as Architect already stated, use one of the MBN mainboards which are designed for this purpose.
1 Like
I have to say. We are even providing options for Gadgeteer modules on MBN mainboards :whistle: